Last year, a school made personalized, student-centered learning a major focus of professional learning. Through workshops, staff meetings, PLCs, and coaching conversations, teachers explored how to:

• increase student voice and choice
• tailor instruction to learners’ strengths, needs, and interests
• create more collaborative and authentic learning experiences
• support students in setting goals and reflecting on their learning

The purpose was clear: not simply to implement new instructional strategies, but to create learning experiences where students increasingly assume responsibility for their own learning through greater voice, choice, reflection, and goal setting.

Throughout the year, some teachers experimented with these practices and began to see promising results. Others watched with interest, tried a few ideas, or chose to wait. Some, due to past experiences, even wondered if this would still be a focus when the new year begins.  A single change in school administration can mean a different focus.

Now a new school year begins. The expectation is no longer to simply learn about personalized learning.  Implementation is an expectation.

At this point, it’s tempting for leaders to ask, “How do we get everyone to believe this will work?”

That may be the wrong first question.

A more productive question is, “How do we help teachers experience enough success with these practices that their confidence and commitment grow?”

Thomas Guskey’s work on teacher change offers an important answer to that question. We often assume that if teachers believe in an innovation, they will implement it. Guskey’s research suggests the change process more commonly works in the opposite direction. Rather than beliefs changing first, teachers’ beliefs frequently change after they implement a new practice and experience evidence that it benefits students.

Instead of thinking about change as:

Beliefs → Practices → Student Outcomes

Guskey proposed a different sequence:

Professional Learning → Changes in Classroom Practice → Improvements in Student Learning → Changes in Teachers’ Beliefs and Attitudes

The implication for coaches and school leaders is significant. The early goal of implementation is not to convince every teacher that the initiative will succeed. The goal is to create conditions where teachers can implement new practices, receive support while doing so, and gather evidence of how those practices influence students. As teachers begin seeing students more engaged, more reflective, more collaborative, and assuming greater responsibility for their learning, confidence grows. Those successful experiences become the foundation for lasting commitment based on a new belief.

Changes in students’ learning production behaviors become the earliest evidence that the new practice is taking hold. They provide teachers with important feedback on the value of the change, long before end-of-unit assessments or standardized test results are available.

Guskey’s approach moves a coach’s focus from “selling a belief” to generating experimentation and reflection. A coach/teacher conversation might proceed like this:

Teacher: I understand the value of student-centered instruction for students to develop learning-to-learn skills. I just don’t see how it fits in my classes. I already struggle to get through the curriculum. Having students explore, debate, and discuss takes time. If I add that, something else has to give.

Coach: It sounds like your concern isn’t whether student-centered learning has value. It’s whether it can work within the instructional time you have.

Teacher: Exactly. If I fall behind, I’m the one who has to answer for it.

Coach: Time is a concern for most teachers. I’m curious, when you picture student-centered learning, what part of it do you think would have the greatest impact on your students learning if you could make it work?

Teacher: Probably having students explain and defend and even argue their thinking with each other, before having any input from me.

Coach: What makes that the concept stand out for you?

Teacher: Too many students wait for me to tell them whether they’re right instead of questioning themselves and each other.

Coach: Suppose you chose one upcoming lesson and we explored, “What do we gain, and what does it cost?”  when generating increased student reflection and engagement. Is there one lesson coming up where you’d envision a benefit from students doing that reflection?

Teacher: Probably next week’s lesson starting a new unit on variables.

Coach: Rather than redesigning the entire lesson, what if we identified one twenty-minute segment where students worked in pairs or triads to develop or compare strategies before you explained them?

Teacher: That still takes extra time.

Coach: Likely. What you’d be looking to decide is “are the benefits worth the costs?” What student behaviors would tell you those twenty minutes were a worthwhile investment? What teacher moves might increase the likelihood of seeing those behaviors? Do you think 20 classroom minutes is a fair risk to take?

Teacher- Sure. I am going to have to describe some of the things I am exploring in my professional growth plan with my principal. This sounds like a doable first step.

Coach: I look forward to seeing what we find out. Think about one or two benefits that would be a valuable payoff for this investment of instructional time and we’ll meet to explore a design to test out. I’ll do a little search for some possibilities in the meantime.

Whatever the change your school is asking teachers to implement this year, keep returning to this question:

“How do we create experiences that allow teachers to discover the value of this work for themselves?”

The role of instructional coaches, teacher leaders, and administrators is not to convince teachers that change will succeed. It is to support thoughtful experimentation, encourage reflection, and help teachers notice the impact their decisions have on students.

When teachers begin seeing changes in students’ learning production behaviors—and those behaviors lead to improved learning outcomes—their commitment to new instructional practices becomes rooted in belief rather than compliance.

Support the process. The viewpoint will follow.

Guest Blog from Dr. Tracy Ocasio, Ed.D. — Chief Learning Officer at Neomind Learning and former Chief Academic Officer, Superintendent, 37-year educator

Tracy has joined me previously on a podcast where we explored the impact of beliefs around rigorous learning. Following a recent conversation about AI possibilities, I asked her to share her current thinking in this blog.

Thanks Tracy.

Leading AI with Purpose: Avoiding One More Initiative

For more than forty years, education has weathered every kind of reform imaginable — standards, accountability systems, data dashboards, MTSS, curriculum overhauls, and high-impact tutoring. We have survived recessions, political swings, and a global pandemic that reshaped the lives of our students and the profession itself. And through it all, teachers have carried the weight of every new demand placed on the system.

Now, we stand at another turning point — one that feels both exhilarating and unsettling. As a 37-year educator, I feel the same mix of hesitation, hope, and responsibility that many of my colleagues feel. We know something big is happening. We also know our teachers cannot withstand another initiative that adds to their already impossible workload. That turning point is AI.

Not AI as a fad or a shortcut.

Not AI as a replacement for teachers — because nothing replaces the human connection at the heart of learning.

But AI as the first scalable instructional support system capable of doing what research has demanded for decades: personalizing learning, diagnosing conceptual gaps in real time, reinforcing grade-level instruction, and expanding intervention capacity without adding to teacher burnout.

The question is no longer whether AI will shape instruction. The question is whether school leaders will lead this shift in a way that empowers teachers rather than overwhelms them.

What the Last 40 Years Have Taught Us About Supporting Teachers

When I began teaching in the 1990s, standardization was the answer to inequity. We believed that if every student received the same lesson, the same materials, and the same pacing, we were giving them the same opportunity. But students never arrived standardized. They arrived with different backgrounds, different readiness levels, and different needs. Teachers were expected to differentiate without tools, diagnose without data, and intervene without support.

In the 2000s, we swung hard toward data. As a principal and district leader, I helped build RTI systems later revised as MTSS, dashboards, and evaluation models. We could finally see the gaps — but we still couldn’t close them at scale. Teachers were asked to analyze data, find root causes, design small-group lessons, and deliver scripted programs that promised consistency but ignored the human dynamics of learning. We expected more than teachers had the capacity to give.

By the 2010s, we finally had research confirming what many of us already knew: high-impact tutoring works. In Washington, D.C. and later in Delaware, I saw dramatic gains when we implemented targeted instruction, exemplar problems, coherence standards, and proactive intervention. But those gains required highly trained staff, intensive coaching, and constant monitoring — a level of human capital most districts cannot sustain.

We had the right instructional model.

We did not have the right delivery mechanism.

For decades, we have known what works: personalized learning, conceptual understanding, high quality feedback, alignment to grade level content, and consistent intervention aligned to the classroom.

What we lacked was the capacity to deliver it at scale. AI finally gives us that capacity.

But capacity without commitment changes nothing. The teachers in your buildings are watching for a signal—whether this is another initiative to survive, or a tool worth investing their trust in. That signal comes from you.

Here is the commitment this moment requires from school leaders:

This week, name the problem you want AI to solve—not “implement AI,” but “reduce the time teachers spend on intervention planning” or “close coherence gaps before they widen.” A vague mandate produces resistance. A specific purpose produces buy-in.

This month, protect a pilot group. Choose a small team of teachers, give them the tool, the time, and the light-touch support to use it well, and shield them from every other competing initiative while they do. Your job isn’t to manage the pilot—it’s to defend it.

This semester, show your staff the evidence yourself. Don’t wait for a vendor report. Sit with the pilot teachers, look at the classroom data together, and let them tell you what’s working and what isn’t. Then act on what you hear.

This year, remove something. If AI is genuinely reducing workload, prove it by taking something off teachers’ plates—a redundant program, a duplicate dashboard, a scripted intervention that was never working anyway. Addition without subtraction is the fastest way to lose teacher trust.

Those who lead this transition with clarity, coherence, and compassion will not only support teachers—they will transform learning for students who have waited far too long for systems that meet their needs.

The shift is coming whether we lead it or not. The only question is whether our teachers face it alone, or with us standing beside them. Choose now.

Email Dr. Tracy Williams: drtracywilliams@icloud.com

Sari Factor, the Vice Chair and Chief Strategy Officer at Imagine Learning, explores the intersection of curriculum, technology, and people. These questions are explored:

• What makes a curriculum high quality?
• How can technology best support the teaching and learning process?
• What role might AI play in extending this intersection?
• How should schools be considering the questions around screen time?
• What role do instructional coaches and school leaders have in supporting high quality learning?

Visit the Imagine Learning website here.

Subscribe to the Steve Barkley Ponders Out Loud podcast on iTunes or visit BarkleyPD.com to find new episodes!

Podcast Transcript:

[00:00:00.340] – Steve [Intro]
Welcome to the Steve Barkley Ponders Out Loud podcast. As instructional coaches and school leaders, you are tasked with guiding continuous teacher growth to create student success. This podcast looks to support you with strategies from experienced guests, as well as my own insights that I’ve gathered over the years. I’m thrilled to have you with us. Thanks for tuning in.

[00:00:30.130] – Steve
Working at the intersection of curriculum, technology, and people to deliver learning outcomes. Our podcast guest today is Sari Factor, the Vice Chair and Chief Strategy Officer at Imagine Learning, an education company that partners with schools and districts to provide digital curriculum and instructional supports. They focus on helping educators personalize learning and expand access so teachers can best meet the strengths and the needs of all learners. In an earlier conversation with Sari, she highlighted the intersection among curricula, technology, and people. I’ve asked her to explore that intersection with us today. Welcome, Sari.

[00:01:21.100] – Sari
Thanks, Steve. Good to be with you.

[00:01:23.910] – Steve
I’m wondering if you’d start – tell us a little bit about your background that’s led to the work you’re doing today with Imagine Learning.

[00:01:33.780] – Sari
Sure. Well, I started as a middle school math teacher. Very short period of time, my first assignment was to teach summer school. To all the 7th grade kids who’d failed 7th grade math. What an assignment for a newbie, right? [laughter]

[00:01:51.370] – Steve
[laughter] You couldn’t write a better one, I’ll tell you.

[00:01:54.760] – Sari
Yeah, the challenge was to get them ready for 8th grade math in 6 weeks, 3 hours a day. I had 9 little boys. I had no test data. I had no information about them. They gave me no curriculum materials. It was me and these 9 little boys. I often say, for me, what really helped me ground myself around the challenges of teaching in all kinds of circumstances, that being a very bad one, but I know a lot of people have been in really difficult situations and dealt a difficult hand of cards that you have to figure out a way through. And so it gives me great compassion for teachers. I immediately moved into the world of publishing and curriculum development, and over time got experience in using technology to help teachers and learners, and really bring it all together through a great 40-plus year career in just that. Imagine Learning supports educators with curriculum and learning solutions designed to create learning experiences that drive better student outcomes. Fundamentally, that’s what we’re trying to do. And we know that we can’t do it ourselves. We have to work through teachers, through school building level leaders, administrators, who are applying the materials that we develop and deliver into the schools, school environments.

[00:03:21.380] – Sari
So that’s kind of the arc. But that first experience really caused me to think deeply about how do we help teachers feel successful in the classroom? Because I think a lot of them do not. There’s a lot of challenges these days.

[00:03:36.290] – Steve
It really illustrates why we lose a lot of teachers early on in their careers. Insufficient support and kind of throw people in the – I don’t know that there’s another profession that does that.

[00:03:54.090] – Sari
I agree, I agree.

[00:03:55.120] – Steve
High need. So would you talk a little bit about what you mean by an intersection of curriculum, technology, and people?

[00:04:04.870] – Sari
Sure. You know, when you think of an instructional system kind of as an interconnected rope, you’ve got curriculum, instruction, assessment, the skills, the standards you have to meet, and professional learning that surrounds that. We know that effective classroom experiences really require clear alignment and coordination across all those elements. And an old mentor of mine used to say, you know, management was great except for the people. Well, If it was in an abstract world, all those things would be connected and they work great. But you go into a classroom and everyone is different. They’re comprised of people. You’ve got a teacher who, you know, and lots of teachers in any building, each of whom has different backgrounds and experiences. They come to the work with different kinds of qualifications and experiences. And then you’ve got 25, 35 students right there in front of that teacher, all of whom also bring different backgrounds and experiences. And so you take that abstraction of the interconnected rope and it needs to be applied across all of those different classrooms and different situations. And so when we think about creating instructional materials, we look at the curriculum and standards, and the assessments that are all part of that.

[00:05:28.170] – Sari
And what’s the way to get the best and most effective application of those? You have to make that product easy to use and usable by the vast different teachers that are out there. And oftentimes, technology can help with that. So that’s why we think about curriculum and using technology to help support the teacher to bring in professional learning, whether it’s through the platform itself or outside of the platform, either virtually or in person. We do a lot of curriculum-based professional learning, not separated, not just here’s a theory of how you would teach something, but it’s very much embedded into the curriculum itself. And that’s been shown as most effective in terms of delivering high-quality instructional materials, you really have to pair it with a curriculum-based professional learning. And that has been effective. And we’re seeing great results in many of the districts that we’re working very closely with to both deliver the curriculum, the technology to support the curriculum, and the professional learning to ensure that the people are successful. Because ultimately, that’s what we’re talking about, student outcomes and making teachers feel good about what they do. Because when they feel good about what they do, we hope they’ll continue to stay in the classroom and do it.

[00:06:49.610] – Steve
So when you’re looking at curriculum, what is it that makes a curriculum qualify as high quality?

[00:06:59.090] – Sari
So what we call high-quality curriculum, sometimes called HQIM, high-quality instructional materials, other states call it high-quality instructional resources, HQIR, they’re grounded in learning science. So we know a lot today about how kids learn. They utilize evidence-based teaching practices, and they’re coherent, meaning that they are sequenced intentionally so that if you’re teaching math, you know what lesson has been taught beforehand or what was taught in the prior grade and what’s coming after, so that they are coherent and they all support student learning as they are building that knowledge and skill throughout their K-12. Learning continuum.

[00:07:45.010] – Steve
So now let’s add the technology piece. I’ll give you the old history. I’ve been in this business a little bit longer than you, but I was teaching a program called Individualized Math.

[00:08:10.570] – Steve
In the ’70s with no technology. And I had all these shelves and shelves and shelves of math and tracked students moving across from one to the next to the next with every student in a different spot at a different time with none of the technology.

[00:08:31.630] – Sari
Yeah, I’ve seen programs like that.

[00:08:33.590] – Steve
And it didn’t work because of none of the technology. We had all the best intentions, but there just wasn’t the possibility of organizing it and making it happen individually for kids.

[00:08:43.980] – Sari
Yeah, and I should explain that Imagine Learning has a broad range of resources depending upon the use case. So we have core curriculum in math, science, social studies, and English language arts that does have print materials and technology, so they work together in an interconnected way. And then we have other curriculum materials, mostly for middle school and high school, that is completely digital that is student self-directed for virtual learning, competency-based learning, credit recovery, and that kind of thing. So, I’m kind of generalizing here, but first thing is we are providing teachers with tools. So that digital-first approach is using the technology to support teachers by organizing materials, building in some of that professional learning that I talked about, so teachers have an opportunity to understand the pedagogy behind the lesson and the instructional strategies that have been proven effective. We have tools that save teachers time. So things like grading – if teachers want help with grading, we have taken an approach where we are using what we call curriculum-informed AI. We’re grading in the context of the curriculum itself. So it’s not some abstraction, it’s built right in. And then, the teacher has an opportunity to get that first draft of the response to the student, and then they can choose to keep it, modify it, or throw it out, you know, throw it out and start from scratch.

[00:10:18.490] – Sari
That is completely under the teacher’s control, which we think is very, very important. We are surfacing insights from the data that we’re collecting from any time that the student is online. We’re surfacing insights to teachers so they don’t have to go digging into reports. We’re enabling them to modify the curriculum if they want to make the lesson shorter. Perfect use cases – you’ve got a 1-hour math lesson, but you know through the insights that you’ve got 8 students who really haven’t mastered the prerequisite skills for today’s grade level lesson. So you could ask our system to change that to a 45-minute lesson and give me a 15-minute lesson where I can do some kind of pre-soaking with that group of students who has not yet mastered the prerequisite skills. We can do that through what we call curriculum-informed AI. The idea here ultimately is to save teachers’ time and free them up so that they can then use their valuable time one-on-one, small group, or whole group with the students monitoring, mentoring, motivating the students in their classrooms. So that’s the teacher side of how technology can really help.

[00:11:40.250] – Sari
From a learner’s perspective, the media and simulations to visualize phenomena, it’s very important. Real-world applications of the concepts. All of our programs really help put kids in the context of the real world as they are evaluating primary sources in social studies or looking at a scientific phenomenon on how a roller coaster works and the physics involved and the math involved there. All of those things go to really help learners understand the concepts that are being taught. And there’s tools to to help them organize their thinking, like guided notes or writing tools, you know, as they’re evaluating primary sources that they can keep a log of what they’re seeing. And then discussion guides for their group work. There’s a lot of group work involved in all of our core curricula that does have tools available for group sessions and so on. We’re purposely limiting the use of AI with students at this point. We’re not keen on all the tutors that have come out. We’re seeing that there’s a lot of risk involved. I’m very concerned about that. But we are looking at very specific use cases of AI with learners, things around math misconceptions as an example.

[00:13:03.970] – Sari
How do we get feedback to kids more quickly. Because the real situation is you’ve got teachers, some of them have student loads of 150, 180 students. And to really know every student well and to look at all their data and get that feedback and act quickly is very challenging. So what we’re looking to do is take data for anything that students have done online and surface that feedback for the students, but, you know, give them feedback more quickly, both surfacing it for themselves. Then we want them to own their learning. Student agency is very important, and I think that technology does help with that as well.

[00:13:41.050] – Steve
Maybe sets up the next question that I had in mind is – what are your thoughts about where students in this process have a chance to learn what we might call the critical life skills – resilience, problem solving, communication, critical thinking. How do you see that fitting in?

[00:14:01.100] – Sari
Yeah, we believe that that is blended right into our curriculum materials. So things like communication, collaboration, it’s a lot of group work as I mentioned. And so they have an opportunity to practice those skills. You know, critical thinking, it is embedded through all of our materials so that students are both learning the skills as well as the critical domain knowledge that is part of the academic standards. I think one of the challenges that we face nationally is the fact that most of the standards are focused on knowledge, on the academic knowledge, and not so much on those skills. But we’re starting to see some changes there. There are several states who have made moves. You know, Colorado calls it the essential skills, as an example, where they are bringing in actually those – some are calling them durable skills, some are calling them human skills, I heard last week. You know, and I think with the advent of AI, the emphasis now on the human skills, the things that make us uniquely human, are starting to come to the fore. So I’m starting to see states states review their standards and actually articulate what they want to see for students.

[00:15:13.610] – Sari
State of North Carolina has learning progressions across the different spans for each of the 7 durable skills that they consider part of their statewide portrait of a graduate. I think that’s a great move. I mean, it helps to make kids more future ready when they graduate once a district or a state articulates what they’re really looking for. And it then gives us as publishers the opportunity to identify those skills more clearly in our curriculum materials once they are part of the standards.

[00:15:47.350] – Steve
Do you see assessment of those kinds of skills being built in?

[00:15:53.310] – Sari
Eventually I do. There are a number of projects right now focused on that specifically. You might have heard of the Skills for the Future project, which is born out of the collaboration between the Carnegie Foundation and ETS. They have done some work there and tasks around that. It’s not a hard learning science yet, and so that’s – I think one of the challenges we’re facing in the field is around that. You know, I have a vision where students are taught to evaluate their own skills here and you do a collaborative a collaborative project. And if you ask each student, almost like we do in the work world, you’re part of a work group and how did you do here as part of that activity? And you ask the other students to evaluate mine.

[00:16:46.770] – Steve
Yeah.

[00:16:47.320] – Sari
And then the teacher gets to see all of those reflections. Now I could see a use case for AI evaluating those things and then surfacing those insights to a teacher. I think those are the kinds of assessments we’re going to see much more so then, how do you grade adaptability? It becomes very, very challenging because it’s so subjective, right? But if you can look at a learning progression over K-12 and say we expect – and, you know, you look at the English language arts standards, there is a lot about what we expect of kids’ communication skills. You know, they have to be able to speak and write as well at that production as well as read, that becomes really important.

[00:17:29.390] – Steve
I’m sensing reflection and feedback is critical on those skill sets, and reflection needs guidance. So as you’re bringing the AI piece in there, I think the more that AI could assist you in getting you to do the reflection, then AI actually give you the feedback.

[00:17:51.540] – Sari
100%. I couldn’t agree more.

[00:17:54.110] – Steve
Yeah. Before we close out, a large part of the listeners to this podcast are instructional coaches and building-level leaders. What role do you see those people have in putting the quality intersection of curriculum, technology, and people together?

[00:18:19.530] – Sari
Oh, it’s essential. It’s really essential. I would say, you know, it’s interesting, I was with a district superintendent. He’d been in his role about 2 years, and they use our Imagine I AM, our version of Illustrative Mathematics program. And I asked him how it was going, and he said, you know, it’s been a little, it’s been a little bumpy. And I said, tell me more about you know, what you did with professional learning. And he said, well, it was in place before I came, there was some instruction for the teachers and so on. I said, have you done any professional learning with your principals? And he said, no, why? And I said, because how do the principals know what to look for when they go into classrooms? So, what we’ve been trying to do is work with our district partners to implement professional learning, not just for teachers, But for the instructional coaches, they’re critical to building capacity within the district itself. And then, of course, with the building-level leaders, because they’re the ones that are holding everybody in the building accountable for following the curriculum, making sure that they’ve got that coherent, that interconnected rope is really working.

[00:19:36.330] – Sari
Because if it’s not, then any curriculum you purchase is wasted. So we really believe strongly that these pieces need to come together. The people, all the actors in a building, the curriculum, all supported by the technologies. That’s why we talk about those three together. So any closing thoughts, anything you’d wanna put out there for teachers, administrators, and…

[00:20:05.260] – Sari
Sure, I would love to just reflect on what’s happening in the market right now around screen time. There’s a kind of a bit of a backlash to all that we went through back that, that really grew during the pandemic years – use of technology in classrooms, often for use cases that various products were not designed for. Nobody thought Zoom school was a good idea. Let’s be realistic, we all were responding to a moment in time and a real need. And I think often we are conflating a lot of things. We’re conflating social media, which has been very damaging to students as they’re developing their social-emotional skills, conflating that – online gaming, which also has been challenging. Gambling, which I see a lot of boys getting pulled into, with the proper and intentional uses of instructional technology in the classroom.

[00:21:06.620] – Sari
I think there’s a real opportunity now to think deeply about, and I’m seeing our school leaders do it, they’re grappling with what are the right uses of instructional technology in the classroom. As I’ve explained to you, we really think deeply about learning science and where using the technology makes sense and where it doesn’t make sense. It should enable the teachers and empower them and enable students to take more agency of their learning. As kids move up through the grades, I would expect that more technology gets used. And we’ve seen legislation around this. Keep it very, very, very minimal – K-5 as kids are learning to read and learning to work in groups and all. Getting those foundational skills that are so important to their whole learning continuum, right? Where more is introduced in middle school, more is high school, because we want kids to be ready for whatever they go on to after high school. They need to be able to go into either the world of work, into higher education, into the military, wherever they choose to go, with the skills that they need. And many of those hirers, those employers, are looking for the computer skills, the ability to articulate how you use AI and what those right applications of AI are.

[00:22:29.590] – Sari
So if we just say no screens or we’re banning all screens, I think that’s a huge mistake. So what I would encourage your listeners to do is really think deeply about what are the intentional uses of technology at each grade level and what are those purposes? What’s the purpose behind which we’re using the technology?

[00:22:50.740] – Steve
So it’s actually part of learning how to learn.

[00:22:53.080] – Sari
That’s correct.

[00:22:53.730] – Steve
I mean, kids leaving school have the majority of learning that they’re gonna have to do in front of them.

[00:22:59.810] – Sari
Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, I mean, the, the other question is the real equity issue, right? Because the kids who have access outside of school are going to use it. And so it’s incumbent on us to teach them how to use AI responsibly, how to use technology responsibly. That is an important skill as an adult. I know sometimes I get distracted into something that I shouldn’t get distracted into. And for kids who don’t have the developed brains that they will eventually, we hope they will, they need to learn about that. They need to learn to put up their own guardrails and focus. And so I do agree that screens have sometimes been distracting in schools. And we gotta guard against that.

[00:23:50.290] – Steve
I’m really, really glad you raised this issue here as we’re wrapping up. What’s the best way that listeners can come back to you with questions or learn more about Imagine Learning?

[00:24:03.350] – Sari
Oh, sure. Well, our website, imaginelearning.com, gives you a good sense of all of our curriculum materials and services. We do offer services beyond professional learning. So just reach out to us. We are in over 50% of the schools in the United States right now but we are eager to work with more. So thrilled to help you.

[00:24:26.610] – Steve
Well, we’ll put your website in the podcast lead-in.

[00:24:31.340] – Sari
Excellent.

[00:24:32.230] – Steve
Thanks so much. I really, really appreciated your insights.

[00:24:36.640] – Sari
I appreciate the time. Thank you, Steve. Take care.

[00:24:40.950] – Steve [Outro]
Thanks for listening, folks. I’d love to hear what you’re pondering. You can find me on Twitter or LinkedIn @SteveBarkley or send me your questions and find my videos and blogs at barkleypd.com.

When a school community commits to creating a Portrait of a Graduate, it is casting a vision of the knowledge, skills, and dispositions students should embody by the time they leave school. It’s a promise—not only to students, but to families, educators, and the broader community. But how does that promise move from words to action? How do we ensure that the daily work of teaching and learning prepares students to live that portrait? Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) can serve as the vehicle to ensure the vision becomes daily practice. PLCs can focus on designing learning experiences likely to produce the desired outcomes—and consistently seek evidence that students are progressing toward them.

This need for alignment between inspiration and implementation connects with thoughts from Seth Godin (Hiding from The Mission). He describes a distinction between “people who want to join a community to be part of something” and those “who want to join a group that gets something done.” In education, our schools need both. We want people who are emotionally and morally connected to a mission—and who are also committed to the day-to-day effort of making that mission real in students’ lives. This is the opportunity PLCs offer.

Making the Mission Visible

It’s one thing to have a compelling vision. It’s another to consistently ask: Are our instructional practices aligned with that vision? Are students experiencing learning that reflects our values and goals?  PLCs can invest in moving the mission from rhetoric to routine. The four key questions of effective PLCs, as developed by DuFour and colleagues, can provide a structure for embedding the Portrait of a Graduate into teaching and learning:

• What do we want students to learn and become? The Portrait of a Graduate defines this across academic and non-academic outcomes—resilience, collaboration, creativity, ethical thinking, and more.
• How will we know if they’ve learned it? Evidence isn’t just test scores. It can include performance tasks, reflections, peer feedback, civic engagement, and authentic demonstrations of learning. I worked with an elementary school where across the year, each teacher completed three half-hour observations of student interactions on the playground. They submitted their observations that were tallied to identify if an impact from a peer leadership program was evident in students’ non directed time.
• What will we do if they haven’t learned it? Teams respond not with blame, but with shared responsibility. Interventions are crafted from a belief in every student’s capacity to grow toward the graduate profile.
• What will we do if they already know it? Stretch opportunities help all learners progress, not just meet a minimum standard. Graduates who embody the school’s mission need opportunities to go beyond compliance and demonstrate leadership and initiative. Successfully meeting standards should provide students with more opportunities and more autonomy, not more work.

PLCs as the Engine of Alignment

Godin emphasizes that those who are part of a meaningful journey “don’t need to be tightly managed” but “want to be enrolled.” In schools, this means that when teachers see PLCs as a vehicle for fulfilling a shared purpose—not just a meeting requirement—they engage differently. They become agents of alignment between vision and practice. To build that sense of enrollment, school leaders and coaches can support PLCs with:

• Time and structures to engage in deep collaboration, not just coordination
• Encouragement to revisit and refine the Portrait of a Graduate as a living document
• Facilitation promoting inquiry, vulnerability, and shared ownership
• A shift from “covering content” to designing experiences that produce observable growth in students’ development

Evidence of Progress

A mission-driven school collects and reflects on evidence—not to evaluate teachers, but to evaluate impact.

 PLCs can routinely ask:

What are we seeing in student work and actions that reflect the attributes of our graduate portrait?

How are students speaking, writing, and behaving in ways that show growth in key competencies?

What adjustments in our instruction are needed to support deeper learning and development?

Coaches can provide reflective questions:

“In what parts of your unit do students actively practice the competencies in the graduate profile?”

“What evidence will we gather that connects student learning to our school mission?”

“How might peer observation help us ensure we’re walking our talk?”

Living the Mission

Seth Godin writes that “if your mission is truly important, the people who follow it will begin to make it part of their identity.” PLCs are not just a structure for school improvement, they are a space where educators can define themselves in relationship to the mission. They are where commitments become actions. The Portrait of a Graduate is a bold aspiration. But it cannot live in isolation. It must be paired with systems like PLCs that prioritize collaborative design, shared accountability, and continual learning. When this happens, schools don’t just talk about transformation—they live it.

Co-teaching teams provide benefits to teachers as they collaborate to maximize personalized learning for their students. Dr. Andrea Honigsfeld, experienced co-teacher and researcher, joins Steve to explore the challenges of building from I/My to We/Our.

Visit Dr. Honigsfeld’s website here.

Email Dr. Honigsfeld: ahonigsfeld@gmail.com

Find Dr. Honigsfeld on Twitter: @AndreaHonigsfel

I was scheduled to facilitate a workshop on coaching and coachability over four days last April for the Near East South Asia Office of Overseas Schools at their conference in Bangkok. As the pandemic built, the conference was cancelled, and I was rescheduled to join their fall conference. Within a few weeks, that conference was cancelled. I was then asked to develop a program that could be offered to individuals in quarantine in different countries in different time zones.

In response, I designed Personalized Coaching, which is built around three one-on-one coaching calls with participants and myself, online facilitated asynchronous learning modules and blogs, podcasts, articles, and videos selected to align with each participant’s personal study plan. Participants begin by viewing a thirty-minute video that highlights elements of instructional coaching and includes links to blogs and podcasts that examine each element in more detail.

After an introductory video, an initial coaching conference with participants provides me with their background and current role at their school. (In some cases, it is the upcoming role at the school or in a new school). We identify a focus for their study and select one of five facilitated online modules that best aligns to their desired outcome. The call is followed with an email that provides links to selected resources to support and expand the online module.

A second call is scheduled three to four weeks later where questions from participants are explored. Sometimes, scenarios from their experiences or predicted possibilities are role played. Additional resources are provided following the outcome of this call. As the study in the online module continues, feedback is provided by a facilitator. About 3-4 weeks later a third coaching call is scheduled as a wrap-up and includes a next step, application, and implementation of new learning. In some cases, several participants are from the same school, so an additional group conference for planning was included. An option is available for participants to extend their study, completing a different online module with additional coaching calls.

As the course progressed, another element of personalization emerged: flexible timing. While we initially announced start and end dates, participants’ schedule conflicts emerged, and discussions highlighted that flexibility would generate deeper and richer learning. A participant shared, “I appreciate that during this COVID 19 that Steve and his staff were flexible and willing to work within the time that I had.” We have now established the course as a rolling enrollment allowing starting and ending times flexed for each participant.

“…. the real question at the heart of a truly personalized system: what works, for which students, in what circumstances?” Julia Freeland Fisher

Throughout this experience, I have been continually impressed with the engagement of the participants. Their questions illustrated the thoroughness of their study with the online modules and their reflection produced insights. The facilitators of the online modules have commented on the quality of the submissions from participants in response to summary and application questions.

Participants’ evaluation responses reinforced the learning outcomes:

“I feel like I am entering the coaching profession with a TON of useful ideas and practices I can utilize regardless of context or how I am serving. I have a better understanding of the spectrum of coaching and appreciation for how multi-faceted it truly is.”

“This professional learning greatly developed my understanding about coaching. Based on this learning and my engagement in conversations with Steve Barkley, I have clear next steps for implementation in my division.”

“I took the module focused on communication and benefitted greatly from the varied resources and conversations with Steve. I’m ready to try some new techniques and have some focused strategies to use with individuals and groups.”

“I like that I have way more to read and learn even though the course is over. I found myself keeping track of the resources that I can use with my colleagues in the near future.”

So, here is my initial assessment. I am quite sure that the participants in Personalized Coaching learned more than had they spent the time at my sessions at the conference. I have spent my career providing training in workshops, facilitated and coached sessions with teachers and administrators. In the last few years, I developed the capabilities to provide similar opportunities using skype and having a person onsite working with me as a facilitator to direct small group conversations and question and answer components. Most recently I am learning how to plan zoom sessions with chat box responses and breakout rooms for the important learning engagement activities. Now my new insight is the impact of personalization.

Critical to personalization is KNOWING. How do I get to know the participants and individuals and how do the learners get to know that I know them? Critical is the learner knowing that my actions, my instruction, is influenced by my knowing.

A participant’s comment: “Steve was able to share a wealth of resources as a follow up to each 1:1 conversation. They were more personalized based on our needs as learners.”

I have shared with many, that this is an important time to reflect on what we have been forced to learn in the past months that can advance our capabilities as school doors open. As I travel again to conferences and workshops, I will be planning how pre and post learning opportunities can increase personalization and enhance the learner outcomes.